Editorial: State parks system needs to be open to new ideas

"Innovation" and "government" are two words that don't normally go together, especially in state government, where so many departments, even the brilliant systems of higher education, sometimes seem stuck in some previous generation.

But there are departments that at least try to figure out new ways of doing things, both from an organizational and technological standpoint. All it takes is an innovate leader at the top of the department, and maybe a push from politicians or circumstances.

The California State Parks system could use some new ways of thinking.

The system was plagued by financial problems two years ago, to the point where community groups were forced to raise money to keep the gates and doors to state parks and historical areas open.

Things are better now from a financial standpoint, but other than a needed change at the top when Ruth Coleman resigned after revelations about $54 million being hidden in untouched funds during the crisis, not much else has changed. The old system is still doing things the same way it always has.

While we appreciate rustic state parks, there's nothing charming about an operation that's stuck in the last century.

Now there's a roadmap to improve certain aspects of the organization. A group called the Parks Forward Commission was created by a mandate from legislators who decided maybe outsiders could point the department in the right direction.

Parks Forward's 12 volunteers studied the issue and gathered input for more than a year, then released a report last week with suggestions.

The 40-page report (see it at http://tinyurl.com/lbdwrbn) says it chose not to just "tinker around the edges" or "just call for more money." Instead, the report says, "we present a plan to transform state park management and modernize state park operations."

The report points out many of the problems that indicate a bureaucracy stuck in the dark ages. The department's thousands of employees still fill out paper time cards. People in upper management must be certified as peace officers for no other reason than that's the way it's always been done. Visitors to many parks can't pay with a debit card. In fact, in many parks guarded by "iron rangers," if you don't have cash to place in a metal pipe, you have to turn back.

When the parks system is scrimping for every dollar, that makes no sense.

It also makes no sense that it's hard for wealthy philanthropists to donate money to their favorite parks. The Parks Forward Commission recommends a nonprofit model, the California Parks Conservancy, to help manage the parks and fund projects the bureaucrats at California State Parks may not be interested in doing.

For example, if the Bidwell Mansion Community Project wanted to give $140,000 to the mansion, that fundraising group should be allowed to decide where the money is spent. It isn't. That makes no sense and takes away any incentive for raising funds. Would you donate $100 to the mansion if you knew it was going to be swallowed by the bureaucracy and spent elsewhere?

Seemingly every time the group tried to hold a fundraiser at the mansion, for the mansion, California State Parks brass came up with red tape to impede it.

Bidwell Mansion was one of 70 state parks that were threatened with closure. Multiply the Chico experience times 70 and you get a feel for how many people the parks system has angered. No wonder state parks are in trouble.

We hope state leadership, including California State Parks and the Legislature, takes a close looks at the Parks Forward plan and has serious, public discussions about what aspects to adopt. State parks are one branch of government that people care deeply about and will support. But not if things stay stagnant, as they have for so many years. It's long past time to try something new.